turtledovefandomcom-20200216-history
Talk:Tsiolkovsky
I believe a Lit. Comm. here will address the needs for the Konstantin Tsiolkovsky article. Unless the story actually says the space shuttle is named after him, the Comment would be the best way to explain the source of the name. ML4E (talk) 00:01, June 22, 2016 (UTC) :The man isn't mentioned at all in the novel.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 00:15, June 22, 2016 (UTC) :I'm not sure even that's necessary. Couldn't something like " . . . named for pioneering Soviet rocket scientist Konstantin Tsiolovzky" be appended somewhere in the body of the article? Turtle Fan (talk) 00:35, June 22, 2016 (UTC) That might be sufficient. Blaise, you created the article on the scientist. Do you have anything to add? ML4E (talk) 16:54, June 22, 2016 (UTC) :See recent talk for Nasser (starship). The consensus there was that while the namesake should be obvious, it shouldn't be in the universe section if the story didn't say it. But maybe that's not set in stone.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 20:18, June 22, 2016 (UTC) ::That discussion is not recent, nor did it result in any kind of agreement, much less of the precedent you're invoking. Stop trying to pass these things off as bigger than they really are. Turtle Fan (talk) 21:21, June 22, 2016 (UTC) ::Also, source of the name of an Arab World spaceship named "Nasser" would be fairly obvious to anyone with a passing familiarity with mid-20th century Middle East history. Tsiolkovsky is more obscure but fairly clear who its named after so either a comment within the article or a Lit. Comm. would be useful. The question remains which? I am okay either way. ML4E (talk) 15:37, June 23, 2016 (UTC) :::For awhile now I've been concerned about the over-proliferation about lit comms. Looking for places where they can be folded into article bodies would be a welcome development. Turtle Fan (talk) 19:19, June 23, 2016 (UTC) ::::Since HT didn't actually reference Konstantin Tsiolovsky directly, leaving the reader to actually "get it", I submit a lit comment is the better course here. TR (talk) 19:28, June 23, 2016 (UTC) :::::Well if you think that's what HT was going for, and want to adhere strictly to his wishes, then we too should leave the reader to get it, by making no mention at all. Turtle Fan (talk) 02:33, June 24, 2016 (UTC) ::::::We can do that, too. TR (talk) 02:41, June 24, 2016 (UTC) :::::::We could. I don't know why we decided somewhere along the way that we needed to spell out everything. Turtle Fan (talk) 02:49, June 24, 2016 (UTC) ::::::::Probably because someone like the Purple Dragon will come along every once in a while and wonder why the basic fact of the naming isn't mentioned.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 03:11, June 24, 2016 (UTC) :::::::::Yeah, likely. Turtle Fan (talk) 04:11, June 24, 2016 (UTC) With the Konstantin Tsiolkovsky article deleted, what should be done here? Lit. Comm., within story remark, leave it alone? ML4E (talk) 22:31, June 30, 2016 (UTC) :Leave it alone. People can look up Tsiolkovsky the man. Otherwise, we have to go through and start writing lit comments for other ships, like the Lewis and Clark (starship). TR (talk) 22:44, June 30, 2016 (UTC)